ThePilgrim

Contempt has been dropped as well!
Counts 1, 2, 3 and 4 Dismissed Without Prejudice >>http://freekenthovind.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/198.pdf
Kent Hovind's Contempt of Court DISMISSED >>http://freekenthovind.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/197.pdf
 

Okay, as of today, according to Dr. Hovind's son, Eric, all the remaining charges have been dropped, having been found without merit. It was done without prejudice,which means technically the charges can be brought up again, if refiled, but at this point, especially with the last having 3 of 4 charges producing a hung jury, it probably won't.
They are still waiting to see what will happen at the sentencing for his contempt conviction, but I suspect, if the other charges were dropped, this may go away, as well. But we'll see. I rarely trust the government to do the right thing. But its looking good right now. 

I'm posting this here to illustrate a problem I have with Pastor Scott's approach to the debate. In this fragment of a post in the debate, he employs 800 words to respond to 100 of mine, & misquotes me so refuting at length a point I didn't make.
FYI a 30 minute sermon of mine takes about 2,000 words to explain the Scripture in context & apply it's teaching. The following, apart from the [ ... ] is a selection from Pastor Markle's post. 
Posted 17 April  by Pastor Markle
Now, in your most previous posting, you did present an opposition to the grammatical and contextual evidences and support that I have provided for my position on Daniel 9:24.  Indeed, your presented opposition appears to be delivered with the following statements:
​​I'm not convinced that your grammatical analysis leads to a proper understanding of the prophecy, or whether it actually obscures the clear meaning of the prophecy. 
[Note that I referred to "your grammatical analysis" & "complicated grammar" with no suggestion that grammatical analysis per se "of a passage is not really a help, but is actually a hindrance in Bible study, especially in relation to prophetic utterance." And I did NOT "deny the grammatical construction of any statement in God’s Holy Word." I hope it goes without saying that understanding grammar is necessary to understanding both the written word & speech. ]
Pastor Markle:
Herein you appear to reveal another premise against which I will have significant contention and opposition.  It is the premise that grammatical analysis of a passage is not really a help, but is actually a hindrance in Bible study, especially in relation to prophetic utterance.  In opposition to this premise, I would contend that grammatical analysis is the arithmetic of communication.  By definition, grammar deals with the meaning of individual words, the meaning of grouped words by phrases and sentences, and the meaning of contextual statements within paragraphs.  Grammar is the very means by which words, phrases, and sentences have precise meaning in communication.  
For example, can we discern any real meaning from the following set of words –
“world whosoever Son life him he God the only his everlasting begotten should perish loved have gave believeth that that so not for but in”
On the other hand, can we discern real meaning from the following set and structuring of words –
 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
No, in the first presentation for this set of words, we cannot discern any real meaning.  On the other hand, in the second presentation for this set of words, we can indeed discern real meaning, and that a very precise meaning.  The reason that we can do this in the second presentation is specifically due to the grammatical structuring by which the words are presented.  Grammar is the very means by which word structuring provides meaning.  To deny grammatical analysis is to deny the precise meaning of any given statement. 
Indeed, to do deny grammatical analysis for a statement of God’s Holy Word is to deny the precise meaning of that statement as inspired by God the Holy Spirit in God’s Holy Word.  The Lord our God chose to communicate His truth and wisdom unto us by means of the words of His Holy Word and the grammatical structuring of those words, as inspired by God the Holy Spirit.  Thus God’s Holy Word is not simply inspired by God the Holy Spirit word-by-word, but also grammatical construction-by-grammatical construction.  Therefore, to deny the grammatical construction of any statement in God’s Holy Word is to deny the inspired meaning and communication of God the Holy Spirit with that statement. 
Furthermore, grammar is not only the very means by which word structuring provides meaning, but is also the very means by which statements are narrowed in their application.  For example –
If I simply employ the word “ball,” then the application is quite broad (although the definition of the word, which is also a point of grammar, does narrow the intention from not including such things as birds, cars, pinwheels, etc.). 
On the hand, if I employ the grammatical phrase, “the ball,” then the application is now more narrow, not referring to any ball in general, but to one specific ball.  (In fact, this use of a the definite article “the” is the very grammatical construction by which you yourself argue that the “covenant” of Daniel 9:27 cannot be just any covenant, but must be some definitely specific covenant.  Even so, I would challenge you that if you do not wish to focus upon grammar as a means to Biblical understanding, then you need to quit pushing this point.)
Now, if I employ the grammatical phrase, “the ball in the car,” then the application is now even more narrow, not referring to the ball in the house, or in the field, or under the car, or beside the car, but to the ball that is to be found in the car.  Grammatically, each modifying phrase narrows the application for the meaning of any given statement.  So then, to deny a modifying phrase that God the Holy Spirit inspired for any given statement is to deny the correct understanding and application that God the Holy Spirit intended for that statement.
Grammatical analysis is not a hindrance to understanding God’s Holy Word correctly, for grammar is the means by which the Lord our God communicated to us in His Holy Word by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit.  Indeed, grammatical analysis is the means by which we can correctly understand that which the Lord our God has communicated unto us through His Holy Word by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit.
Actually I question that final statement. Most people who can read have enough grammar to understand what they are reading.  Only believers have a spiritual understanding - an understanding aided by the indwelling Holy Spirit - as they believe & practise what they read & understand. Many (most?) theologians & preachers fail to understand correctly what they read, teach & preach, however perfect their grammar. 
   

An unemployed man is desperate to support his family. His wife watches TV all day and his three teenage kids have dropped out of high school to hang around with the local toughs. He applies for a janitor's job at a large firm and easily passes an aptitude test. 
       
      The human resources manager tells him, "You will be hired at minimum wage of $5.15 an hour. Let me have your e-mail address so that we can get you in the loop. Our system will automatically e-mail you all the forms and advise you when to start and where to report on your first day." 
       
      Taken back, the man protests that he is poor and has neither a computer nor an e-mail address. To this the manager replies, "You must understand that to a company like ours that means that you virtually do not exist. Without an e-mail address you can hardly expect to be employed by a high-tech firm. Good day." 
       
      Stunned, the man leaves. Not knowing where to turn and having $10 in his wallet, he walks past a farmers' market and sees a stand selling 25lb crates of beautiful red tomatoes. He buys a crate, carries it to a busy corner and displays the tomatoes. 
       
      In less than 2 hours he sells all the tomatoes and makes 100% profit. Repeating the process several times more that day, he ends up with almost $100 and arrives home that night with several bags of groceries for his family. 
       
      During the night he decides to repeat the tomato business the next day. By the end of the week he is getting up early every day and working into the night. He multiplies his profits quickly. Early in the second week he acquires a cart to transport several boxes of tomatoes at a time, but before a month is up he sells the cart to buy a broken-down pickup truck. 
       
      At the end of a year he owns three old trucks. His two sons have left their neighborhood gangs to help him with the tomato business, his wife is buying the tomatoes, and his daughter is taking night courses at the community college so she can keep books for him. 
       
      By the end of the second year he has a dozen very nice used trucks and employs fifteen previously unemployed people, all selling tomatoes. He continues to work hard. 
       
      Time passes and at the end of the fifth year he owns a fleet of nice trucks and a warehouse which his wife supervises, plus two tomato farms that the boys manage. The tomato company's payroll has put hundreds of homeless and jobless people to work. His daughter reports that the business grossed a million dollars. 
       
      Planning for the future, he decides to buy some life insurance. Consulting with an insurance adviser, he picks an insurance plan to fit his new circumstances. Then the adviser asks him for his e-mail address in order to send the final documents electronically. 
       
      When the man replies that he doesn't have time to mess with a computer and has no e-mail address, the insurance man is stunned, What, you don't have e-mail? No computer? No Internet? Just think where you would be today if you'd had all of that five years ago!" 
       
      "Ha!" snorts the man. "If I'd had e-mail five years ago I would be sweeping floors at Microsoft and making $5.15 an hour."
 

An unemployed man is desperate to support his family. His wife watches TV all day and his three teenage kids have dropped out of high school to hang around with the local toughs. He applies for a janitor's job at a large firm and easily passes an aptitude test. 
       
      The human resources manager tells him, "You will be hired at minimum wage of $5.15 an hour. Let me have your e-mail address so that we can get you in the loop. Our system will automatically e-mail you all the forms and advise you when to start and where to report on your first day." 
       
      Taken back, the man protests that he is poor and has neither a computer nor an e-mail address. To this the manager replies, "You must understand that to a company like ours that means that you virtually do not exist. Without an e-mail address you can hardly expect to be employed by a high-tech firm. Good day." 
       
      Stunned, the man leaves. Not knowing where to turn and having $10 in his wallet, he walks past a farmers' market and sees a stand selling 25lb crates of beautiful red tomatoes. He buys a crate, carries it to a busy corner and displays the tomatoes. 
       
      In less than 2 hours he sells all the tomatoes and makes 100% profit. Repeating the process several times more that day, he ends up with almost $100 and arrives home that night with several bags of groceries for his family. 
       
      During the night he decides to repeat the tomato business the next day. By the end of the week he is getting up early every day and working into the night. He multiplies his profits quickly. Early in the second week he acquires a cart to transport several boxes of tomatoes at a time, but before a month is up he sells the cart to buy a broken-down pickup truck. 
       
      At the end of a year he owns three old trucks. His two sons have left their neighborhood gangs to help him with the tomato business, his wife is buying the tomatoes, and his daughter is taking night courses at the community college so she can keep books for him. 
       
      By the end of the second year he has a dozen very nice used trucks and employs fifteen previously unemployed people, all selling tomatoes. He continues to work hard. 
       
      Time passes and at the end of the fifth year he owns a fleet of nice trucks and a warehouse which his wife supervises, plus two tomato farms that the boys manage. The tomato company's payroll has put hundreds of homeless and jobless people to work. His daughter reports that the business grossed a million dollars. 
       
      Planning for the future, he decides to buy some life insurance. Consulting with an insurance adviser, he picks an insurance plan to fit his new circumstances. Then the adviser asks him for his e-mail address in order to send the final documents electronically. 
       
      When the man replies that he doesn't have time to mess with a computer and has no e-mail address, the insurance man is stunned, What, you don't have e-mail? No computer? No Internet? Just think where you would be today if you'd had all of that five years ago!" 
       
      "Ha!" snorts the man. "If I'd had e-mail five years ago I would be sweeping floors at Microsoft and making $5.15 an hour."
 

As the saying goes, power corrupts, so it's really little wonder the power politicians in both Parties are corrupt to one extent or another. Look how quickly they change their positions for the sake of public image and votes. Look how easily they reject the stances of their predecessors which they claim to follow. Look at the sin they willingly support, compromise with and even promote. Then consider the fact most are lost and therefore lost in sin and servants of the devil. Even of the few who may be saved, their actions indicate they are immature Christians at best.
I appreciate street preachers who go forth preaching in accord with Scripture, but those who go forth seeking confrontation, yelling in anger, name calling and showing what is (or at the least appears to be) hate for sinners rather than love, do far more harm than good. It does little good, for instance, to stand in front of a bar and scream at the drunkards, telling them they are vile sinners doomed to hell if they don't give up the booze. That's not the Gospel. Too many street preachers want to demand sinners give up a particular sin and then come to Christ. Yelling at a bunch of drunks isn't the way to spread the Gospel.
Then there are those street preachers who love to get into debates with the lost over issues of evolution or some other matter. Rather than presenting the Gospel they spend their time in side arguments, often arguing in the same manner as the lost.
Scripture tells us even if we do something right, if we aren't doing so in love, it counts for nothing. How much worse off are we if are doing something wrong, claiming it's right, and also doing it with a lack of love?
It's difficult to keep our flesh under control, and something we can't do without surrendering to Christ and doing things His way. It seems especially easy to let our emotions, pride, personal beliefs and such matters rile us up and dominate our words and actions when we are young. Unfortunately, some keep on in this way and fail to mature in this even when they are older.
I've met some good street preachers. Their work in an area helps other Christians to share the Gospel, to have meaningful conversations with the lost there, to open some lost ears. This is a blessing that the screaming, critical, attacking street preachers don't bring to an area.
With several "Christians" running for president already it's interesting to read the many comments online regarding the individual candidates and how potential voters view their Christianity. Some are willing to accept any politicians claim to be a Christian, others are quick to attack their Christianity, some take the time to go over candidates views in comparison with Scripture.
One thing is clear, most Christian candidates today take political positions which Christian candidates of previous generations would have had nothing to do with.
Political events can be a place to share the Gospel, pass out tracts and such. Unfortunately, the ground in these places doesn't seem to be very fertile since most already have their minds made up, most seem to already consider themselves to be Christians (even tho most are secular, not biblical Christians) so they pay little heed to the Gospel.
We can share the Gospel when we can and we should always be living in a way which allows others to see Christ in us.

Where it all went down was the judges that were appointed.  People put a lot of effort into that.  We didn't get what we paid for lol.  So to speak.  Judge Bork was kind of a tipping point.  I guess I could review that.  Media does appear to have a bias.  Can make it look like the whole country is coming at you.  If your against what they think is right.  Shame you for going after victims that they have designated as victims.  In abortion.  Women were the victims.  Which was very, very clever.  They took the issue of the pre-born.  Not showing anything of the violence of abortion.  Ever at any point on television.  In a way you don't expect that.  
Because television deals in sin.  Its not propaganda in my opinion. Its not brainwashing.  It just sin eroding away righteousness and all the good things you have.  You can get mad at sinners I guess for doing what they do.  The TV is just chock full of every sin.  Violence etc.  Just name it.  Its the world. Its on there. Hey, things are reasonable on TV just let me get a peek.  Its always been that way with TV.  There were no good ole days.  Just worse and worse r.   Its getting worse r even still.
I guess some wonder why some of us like these street preachers.  Young people that come out and condemn sin in public.  Its just good to see young men that are strong in the Lord.  Youtube is very interesting when it comes to being able to choose your own content.  I can listen to some of those preachers for hours.  When I get the chance.  Of course there is the mystical, conspiratorial and just plain nonsense too. Then again there are some really good programs.  My opinion.   
One thing that is sorely lacking.  I mean nothing of.  Is addressing the subject of the poor.  You can assume its there.  But I see none of it.  It's become the tipping point in many cases.  Those without outnumber those with.  That's usually the case.  Poor Christians are rich in faith.  I could go on and on.  The poor are fairly easy to rob.  lol.  Doesn't take much.  Its like the SBC using every justification on earth for slavery.  Back when. They twisted scripture until you couldn't even recognize it was a book.   People hunger for good and moral things.  The poor are a moral subject.   God hears their cry.  You have to wonder why Atlanta got burned to the ground back when.   I know a lot of people don't really consider things like that.  Your not supposed to favor one over the other in judgement. However if one is stealing from the other.  By holding back.  Then God may just even the score.  This world loves trouncing the poor Jesus even said it.  Like I say be careful who you run with. Someone just may be getting hurt by the company you keep.   Choose none of the ways of the oppressor.  True that oppressor may be the Devil.  However that's what he does and that's who he uses. 
I would rather listen to pee wee Herman's advice on employment and working.  Than listen to the SBC's advice.  They need to flush some of their ways.  I many people quoting things like "well its what you agreed to" and masonry they need to dump that before I listen to any of what they have to say.  
It's not about paying enough.  It's not about what cause you support.  It's not even what you give.  Its about holding back on your labor.  They need that.  God said it.  Its in the Bible.  I believe the Bible.  I'm not going to try and please the world to get a little richer. Preach the whole council of God to the Congregation. That's all.   Then again that's not in some peoples best interest.  I understand.  Been there done that.  
You want moral issues public, abortion, porn, sodomite rights, etc. etc.  Bring out the whole watermelon.  There are poor in this country.  Believe it or not.  Its not of trickery or manipulation.  Simply preach the Word of God.  I mean would I treat people of means in the congregation as benefactors,? no way.  You rebuke sin.  You don't dance with it.  lol.  Love everyone in the congregation.  Tell the truth.  Holding back is hating someone.  

Growing up in a very rural, small town there wasn't any hippies or war protestors around here. Thankfully I was spared from being dosed with much liberal propaganda from that era until I was much older and able to rightly evaluate it.
The veterans in this town, from WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, (and later the other wars) were always respected, equally accepted and equally honored.
America isn't perfect, isn't the greatest nation in every category (more-so back then than now), but America is my home, the land of my birth, the nation both sides of my family have called home for generations, and I love America no matter how many warts she's developed.
Our neighbor lost both his legs to "friendly fire" in Vietnam. He could have been bitter, could have blamed America for spending the rest of his life in a wheelchair, but he chose not to. He didn't agree with everything involving that war but he proudly served and never shied away from proclaiming himself as a Vietnam veteran. He died several years ago and his son now lives in his former home.
I'm not sure what the above references to Israel have to do with the topic of America and Vietnam, but I've been a "fan" of and supporter of Israel since I was a young child. That's never changed, not even when I had several very anti-Semitic friends in university for a few years.
Every nation will one day be judged by the Lord. The best we can do in the meantime is do what we can to help as many people as possible come to Christ.

​This reminds me of a short routine by a comedian.
  He is writing for a TV series, and in it, he says he uses the term "midget" in his script. Well, the producer is furious and says he cant say "Midget". The comedian asks why, and the producer tells him that its a terrible, demeaning word. Again, the comedian can't get it, says "Why is midget so bad?". The producer tells him, "Midget is as bad as the "N"-word!" To which the comedian replies, "No it isn't", and the producer says "Yes, it is!', and the comedian says, I know its not as bad-you know HOW I know?"  "How?" "because if it was as bad as the 'N' word, we wouldn't be saying 'midget'.
The use of the phrase "N"-word, is a great example of how we are brainwashed. I get the term is bad, and there is no real good use for the word, but sometimes it can be used as an explanation of bad words not to use against people, and the like-I mean, It's not a word that if we say it, we're going to go to hell that instance-I can write here, "The word 'nigger', is a terrible word to use to describe anyone, and it shouldn't be used as such", and there is nothing wrong with that. Yet its gotten so bad that, as I recall some years back a fellow was called a racist for using the word 'niggardly', meaning stingy, and those who didn;'t understand it got horribly offended, and even when the word was explained, they decided it was still a horrible word to use, because it KINDA sounds like the other word.  We have been brainwashed into saying "N"-word, yet those to whom it once was used, use "nigger' regularly to describe themselves or others of that same skin tone.  Weird. But its all about social engineering.

I am afraid when the history of our times is written this move by Western leaders will be considered one of the biggest mistakes of the twenty first century.
http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/05/putin-all-by-himself-in-red-square-with.html

​Maybe you should make a trip to the post office and get some new ones.  You should probably pick up some post holes too. 

Your closer to my age then.  I am from Mi.  Originally.  Here where I am you see Asians.  However its kind of in streaks.  They are kind of hard to have tracts ready for. Because sometimes you see many and sometimes not.  We have one guy that was in Vietnam.  U.S. Military.   That goes with us.  Your commitment is great.  Staying away from home for so long.  
I try reaching in-town people.  (In the city) Atlanta.  I would like to see a witnessing scenario.  That would be interesting.  Some of my friends and I admire.  The number of missionaries the IFB Church's seem to have.  Their commitment to them.  They seem to take overseas missionaries very seriously. It seems like a deeper level of commitment.  Not to denigrate what I do.  I look at people like you and well...    

Potatochip,
We are native Americans. Both my wife and I are from Missouri, our home chuch is in Michigan, and all except one of our children, are grown and live in the States. One of our children has returned back  here to Taiwan as a missionary also.
One of the Air Force (Chinese), bases that I was stationed at during the Vietnam War was here on Taiwan. I had just gotten saved and  God called me to come back to Taiwan as a missionary. We have been in Taiwan since 1989 and go back to the States every four years to report to our supporting churches. The next time we return to the States is in November 2016.
 Your friend is correct. The Far East, specificly, Japan, Taiwan (Taiwan is Free, or Democratic, China), and Thailand, are devout Buddhists (idolatrous), and Taoist, (also a idolatrous religion), and both are not very reseptive to the gospel. The Orientals, especially the Chinese, also follow the teachings of Confucious. Confucianism (which is also idolatrous), teaches ancestor worship, and, except for a few concepts, is not compatible with Christianity.  There are also other problems too numerous to mention that make it a challenge in seeing souls saved and converted to Christianity in the Far East.  
Mainland  China is now communist and the background of the Chinese  there is also Buddhist. Buddhism is a very satanic religion (that originated in India), and there is close to nothing compatible (in our religious beliefs), with any denomination of Christianity. The Chinese and Japanese are hard to reach. The Philippine people are primarily Catholic, but are more open to the Gospel and many souls are being saved in that country. Malaysia is Muslim and they are hard to reach also.
Maybe soon I will do a  witnessing situation in this thread to let all know how, and what passages that we use in our personal witnessing, in leading people to Christ.
Alan

Ps 27:4
One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to inquire in his temple.
KJV
 

​No matter how I look at it, it is what it is.

Ps 27:4
One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to inquire in his temple.
KJV
 

​Ok, I'll bite.
Dave says that it's not possible for someone to correctly "analyse" the grammar of a sentence and yet draw incorrect conclusions about what the grammar means. This argument relies on a premise that grammar is like maths: it's totally unambiguous when used correctly.
I reject that premise, with a hypothetitical example. Let's say I publish a book with three co-authors, and lets say I get my own little acknowledgments section. I want to thank my co-authors and I want to thank two other people who helped me whose names are Rod and Jane. So here goes:
"I wish to thank my co-authors, Rod and Jane."
Then Timmy comes along and reads the sentence and thinks, "ah, this person's co-authors are called Rod and Jane."
So let's look at what's happened:
Did I use grammar correctly? Yes I did. I used the most popular British way of listing items in a sentence, which is to omit the serial comma before the word "and".
Was Timmy's "analysis" of my grammar invalid? Nope. It's common for people to use a comma to put things in apposition. In this case, according to Timmy, the co-authors and their names. Therefore it's perfectly possible that I did mean to thank the co-authors and give their names, and Timmy's analysis isn't invalid.
Was Timmy's conclusion about what my grammar means correct? No, he got it wrong. His analysis was valid--it's correct to use a comma like that--but his conclusion was wrong because I employed the comma in an equally valid way that means something different. In other words, the grammar in the sentence is ambiguous.
So I argue that at least in principle it is possible for Pastor Scott's analysis of the grammar of that (or any) passage to be correct and his understanding of that grammar to be incorrect. In other words, grammar is not like maths. It might be more like maths than the meaning of words, but it isn't us unambiguous as all that.
And here's what I'm not arguing:
That all grammar is ambiguous. I'm not saying that. Maybe the passage in question in this discussion lends itself to no other valid grammatical interpretation. But Dave appears to be making a general argument about interpreting grammar and it's specifically that "critical point" I'm arguing with.
That I wrote a book that got looked at by Timmy. I'm not saying that. It's a hypothetical example.
That the problem in the hypothetical example is unavoidable. I'm not saying that. Obviously I could write the sentence with a serial comma, or bullet-point the people I want to thank. Or Timmy could look up the co-authors. But that's all irrelevant to the point the hypothetical example is supposed to illustrate.

​I hope it gets covered because so much hangs upon this. All these side arguments are pointless if this key point can't be rightly addressed.

This is the key point. If we are to take Scripture literally then why are the 70 weeks not literal? Where is it stated that the 70 weeks will consist of 69 consecutive weeks which will be followed by hundreds of weeks that don't count until at some unspecified time the 70th week will finally begin?
Unless or until this key point can be settled much of the rest is left hanging. ​

​So - what hope is there for the ordinary reader - like Tyndale's plough boy - to understand what he is reading? I seek to teach what the Scriptures actually say.

 

Yes. but little plough boys, as well as shepherds, fishermen & tax collectors have been equipped by the Holy Spirit to become apostles, prophets, evangelists; pastors and teachers. 
1 Cor. 1:26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

How about 
Matthew 16:18-19 
"18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
We need grammar applied to scripture, otherwise we all would need to rely on a pope. 

Ian:  Grammar alone cannot give an interpretation of that passage. Nor can dictionary definitions. Nor the dictates of a pope. Every individual word is readily understood, but none of the clauses after "Thou art Peter" can be properly understood by grammatical analysis. Spiritual understanding is absolutely necessary, aided by cross references to Acts & the epistles.  
 

Recipe for disaster i suspect. In all relationships, the one who shows the least interest is always in control. Even in this post women's lib culture, when women chase men the men tend to start running away faster.
Back off and let him come to you. If he doesn't then you have your answer. Might seem a hard idea now but will save you pain later.

1. It's what every citizen should discuss when they hear political speech occur near them. 2. We have one political system in this nation.
I will do my part to make it go viral. If it's ignored or precluded after that then as a nation we'll get what we deserve.